- From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 11:14:23 +1000
- To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
On 20/01/2016 5:37 AM, Arthur Ryman wrote: > I can see some benefit for the SHACL processor reporting a warning if > the object of sh:class cannot be recognized as a class based on the > shapes graph. This may catch simple typos. +1 not just typos but also to drive input tools and to communicate the intent. And whether someone wants to validate the shape definitions or not is a choice - there is nothing in the spec that says that a shapes graph must validate OK prior to validating the data. In any case, we could possibly downgrade the severity of the constraint "the values of sh:class must be classes" to sh:Warning. This would be an implementation detail of the shacl.shacl file. Holger > > However, the data graph is certainly allowed to use any resource as if > it were a class without explicitly declaring it to be a class. > > -- Arthur > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 9:52 AM, RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue > Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote: >> shapes-ISSUE-117 (non-classes as classes): sh:class should not require that its objects be known to be instances of rdfs:Class [SHACL - Core] >> >> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/117 >> >> Raised by: Peter Patel-Schneider >> On product: SHACL - Core >> >> Currently the spec says: >> >> The property sh:class can be used to verify that each value of the given property is an instance of a given type. The values of sh:class must be classes (instances of rdfs:Class). >> >> In Holger's implementation this is checked in conjunction with the data graph, meaning that a SHACL shape's syntactic correctness depends on the data graph. >> >> Instead, objects sh:class triples should not need to be instances of rdfs:Class. This means that the shape >> >> [ rdf:type sh:Shape; sh:scopeClass pp:Person ] >> >> should be syntactically correct. >> >> >>
Received on Wednesday, 20 January 2016 01:14:58 UTC